Attack on the First Amendment
"How its Part of an Effort to Change the Structure of our Government"
The First Amendment is always under attack here in America. Its under attack by everyone from the Liberal community who want to cause harm to those they disagree with, as well as certain religious groups who believe that criticism of aspects of their religion should be a punishable offense.
Social media has since jumped on board and is limiting opinions based around whether or not they conform to their liberal ideology, and if not, such said posts and groups are subject to be silenced. The conservative news site Prager U has not only been silenced, but in some cases their videos have been demonetized by Google. Educational videos on the process of how the government works have been deemed “not suitable for children”, and Liberals are pressing to allow children to vote. Imagine that.
Several conservative leaning Facebook groups have been shut down or closed without notifying group admins because they have been accused of going against “community standards”, “Facebook policies”, or even their terms of service. The policies or terms are never specified, only generalized. Twitter has recently been under fire for censorship by silencing several conservative leaning groups decrying hate speech.
David Brock of Media Matters is winning his war against conservatism. He outlined a road map as to how he would go about this endeavor not just to make President Trump look bad, but how he would go about silencing dissenting opinions. Southern Poverty Law Center, another group that seeks to silence those who disagree and declares them as hate groups. These two organizations, are the censor monitors for social media giants.
What can Conservatives do to counteract this attack on our unalienable right to free speech? That's a loaded question. Because it involves an entirely different philosophy from which conservatives are familiar with. The philosophy of being pro-active.
Congress needs to institute legislation and force social media giants to adhere to the principles of free speech, and end their practice of discrimination. This is not advocating for threats of violence, but rather a free flowing discussion on issues that are important to Americans who dispute an idea. If congress fails to act, especially here in the United States, then an alternative social media must present itself. There are alternative social media sites, such as Gab.AI, which promotes free speech, however they were shut down due to an attack on a synagogue. Apparently, the subscriber who carried out the attack posted some antisemitic remarks causing the company hosting their site shut them down.
Another social media site, MEWE touts that it believes in free speech, however, the owner of MEWE worked in the previous presidential administration, causing some to believe that they will eventually be targeted should the left ever take charge. In addition, it is an inferior product to that which already exists. Sharing, commenting, and uploading videos are not as easy as other social media sites. Many users said the UI was “klunky”.
Some religions consider questioning the religion with respects to it's dogma would be considered blasphemous. In some countries this act of questioning is illegal. On social media, the same tenant applies. Therefore, paving the way for the revision of the First Amendment. In Europe, the "blasphemous" act has landed people in jail. Same policy has been used in Australia, whereby "A human-rights court upheld an Austrian woman’s conviction for disparaging the Prophet Muhammad."
How could this be accomplished here in the United States where people are free to say and express themselves without governmental consequences? While we are free to criticize any religion, the government, or the press, we are not free to promote panic. For example, screaming fire in a confined area such as a movie theater is not covered under the free speech law because it incites panic and will cause harm with people trying to free themselves from impending doom. Libel and Slander are also NOT covered under the First Amendment.
It is not too far of a stretch to make an assumption that insulting ones religious doctrine will cause a panic within the people of such said religion. Causing such panic that those incited will act with reckless disregard to others around them. This has been demonstrated in Garland Texas during the draw Muhammad contest. And the attacks on a news agency in France, Charlie Hebdo. People panicking due to someone questioning their religious philosophy, and taking actions that adhere to their religious dogma, even though it goes contrary to civilized society.
Social media is actively censoring conservative opinions, as well as using their logic algorithms to force conservatives into echo chamber. Once they have fully implemented this, they will seek to shadow ban or outright ban all dissenting opinion. Main Stream Media outlets are already pushing a more regressive ideology.
Where do people turn when they want to hear different opinions? Where do people turn when they want to read original documentation on subjects? Google? Google has altered their search engines to present the most popular opinions first. Either media articles dealing with the subject, or that which reflect an ideology of one inclusive government that encompasses the world.
The United States has a unique government. It is a constitutional republic, whereby the officials are elected by the people. The republic must govern according to the laws of the constitution, and its actions are subject to judicial review. The Economy is primarily Capitalist, but includes some government organizations, so we have a “mixed economy”.
There are politicians who are actively engaged in trying to change the construct of our government. Their goal is increasing the size of government to encompass every aspect of life from cradle to grave as well as insisting the government should run the economy, or at least a majority of it. That is a Socialist style government.
They have targeted our voting system laying claim that popular vote should represent the entire country. The electoral college ensures that all 50 states have a stake in the election so that 3 large states don’t dictate policy for all 47 others.
Also under attack is the supreme court process. Many political action groups coordinate lawsuits with the government in a scheme called “sue and settle” where effectively, a political agenda can become law based on the lawsuit settlement “setting precedent”. This is called “legislating from the bench”.
These politicians, left to their own demise, will make promises like better living conditions, free money, free college, free health care, and other utopian ideals. People eat it up, but little do they know that their ideas will not work. In essence, politicians are lying to get votes, and some even openly proclaimed doing so.
If one was to claim on social media that these ideas are ridiculous in nature from a practical or fiscal stand point, that leads to censorship. The main stream media pushes their inclusive one world view upon its followers, and those who believe in self autonomy are being driven out by either shaming them into acceptance, or by simply silencing their opinions and facts. This is not freedom and liberty, it tyrannical oppression.
Wecu has a solution to stop the censorship. If you want to find out more please send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org. We would love to hear from you